
mikep at randomtraveller
Nov 5, 2009, 2:39 AM
Post #9 of 9
(170 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: Encoder (slave) "currently not connected" or "currently asleep"?
[In reply to]
|
|
Chris Pinkham wrote: > * On Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 11:26:48AM +0000, Mike Perkins wrote: >> I was wondering about that. I have a workstation which I would contemplate >> putting a back end in if I knew the MBE would understand the various states >> it could be in. >> >> 1. Me working and SBE available, manually started and stopped. > > This is understood now, it's the old default state of connected/not-connected. > Technically in the code, the slave's status is sStatus_Undefined (sleep status > undefined) since it can't be put to sleep or woken up. > >> 2. SBE invoked by master, recording and shut down afterwards. > > This is the new sleeping capability, the master knows it can wakeup/shutdown > the slave so it's status is one of: > > sStatus_Awake - slave is awake and available for recording > sStatus_Asleep - slave is asleep and can be awakened for recording > sStatus_FallingAsleep - slave was awake and was told to go to sleep > sStatus_Waking - slave was asleep and the master ran the wakeup command > >> 3. Powered down by me, but available if MBE requires it (woken up by WOL >> code). > > This is the new TODO item. I want to add a way, from the command line, to > tell the master that a slave (that can be awakened) is being put to sleep. > My current implementation idea for this is to add an option to mythbackend > that causes mythbackend on the slave to connect to the master and tell it > to tell the slave mythbackend to go to sleep. Something like this on the > slave: > > mythbackend --gotosleep > > Then the master would tell the slave backend to go to sleep just like the #2 > case above. The master can never truly know if it can wakeup a slave unless > it shutdown the slave (barring any unforseen power issues). So, the > shutdown in #3 would have to be 'run by' the master so he knows that the > slave can be awakened. The master can't just assume that when the slave > disconnected that he can still wakeup that slave. What if you shutdown the > slave for maintenance and don't want it powered on or it can't be powered > on. The master can't assume it can be turned on for scheduling purposes, so > it has to assume it can't. > >> Obviously, there could be times when I went to shut it down while it was >> recording, where it would need to remain awake until the recording+optional >> processing had finished, then shut itself down. Presumably this could be >> achieved by the use of a cunning script. Thoughts? > > One other TODO item is to better integrate with the JobQueue, allowing > slaves to optionally be woken up to process jobs inside their job window, > etc.. Right now the master won't tell the slave to go to sleep if the > slave is busy with a mythtranscode or mythcommflag job. This is checked > via the inuseprograms table. > That's exactly what I had in mind, but obviously without knowing how the various parties communicated and when I couldn't visualise the process you've outlined. Thanks. -- Mike Perkins _______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
|